One Character consistent with all projects is Negotiation and this forms part of the

most significant scope of a project manager’s work, However, the foundation of all
successful negotiation has its bearing in the depth and quality of preparation
engaged even before the actual negotiation process takes place (Schelling, T. 1960).
Because much of the work on negotiation circles around preparation, a business
magazine describes negotiation as a ‘’ contest of prepation’’ (Lewicki, R. 992). it is
therefore very necessary and crucial that sufficient time is spent in preparing for the
different negotiations that a project will be involved with and plan adequately for each
possible negotiation. To Emphasize the Importance of negotiation Schelling, T.
(1960) concludes that the difference between successful and unsuccessful
negotiation often lies in the quality of preparation of the party’s negotiating.

There are basically to broad categories of preparing for negotiation according to

Craddock, W. T. (2010), firstly, preparation of self (the negotiator) this aspect of
preparation involves equipping yourself with relevant knowledge, skill and needed
attitude to achieve the goals you are seeking in a specific negotiation and secondary
preparation of the “ground” which is taking actions before the negotiation process
that will increase the likelihood of you succeed during the time for negotiating.

Preparation is necessary to allow the negotiator decide beforehand choose which

approach he/she is going to use in a particular negotiation either point approach or
principled approach as suggested by Raiffa, H. (2002).

The point approach is further subdivided in to Resistance or minimum point or Target

or objective point, the difference between these two-point approaches gives the
negotiator room to move and the relationship between them is that they set the
scope for the negotiation bargain.

 By choosing the resistance point, the negotiator will be able to set the
minimum outcome to be achieved in the negotiation, this becomes the point at
which he/she will be able to walk away if the counterpart is not willing to settle
for it (Anton, R. J.1990). This minimum point according to Raiffa, H. (2002) will
also enable the negotiator to begin to consider the best alternative to a
negotiated agreement (BATNA) i.e. Alternatives that might greatly be feasible
should the bargain fail.
  Target point, this point approach gives the negotiator the best possible
outcome that may possibly come from an agreement and may be a good
anchor for the negotiation (Anton, R. J.1990).

On the other Hand, the principled approach to negotiation according to Anton, R. J.

(1990) is naturally distributive in nature and avoids conflicts between the two parties
and is the best breeding ground for interactive solution development process where
focus is channelled on the underlying interests and not stated interests. If the
negotiator takes this approach and manages to reach agreement with the other
party, they have assured a safe starting point for future negotiation.

Of great importance to be taken as part of the preparation also is that the approach
taken (point approach or the principled approach) at the back of the negotiator it
must be established that both interests and goals in a particular negotiation may
change as the negotiation process unfolds, hence the need for flexibility (Raiffa, H.
2002).

After having established the approach there are a number of techniques that will also
help aid the success of a negotiation among which are.

 Understanding of your goal, the negotiator must clearly outline his /her goals
and objective for the negotiation, in so doing the temptation of deviating from
the main purpose the negotiation (Raiffa, H.2002).
 The Negotiator must make a thorough research of the other party, a good
understanding of the counterpart’s personality and business back background
will give the negotiator realistic expectations as he goes into the negotiation.
 Consider all your options, this becomes very important when the deal collapse
to choose the best alternative.in addition, a good consideration of all options
gives the negotiator a good understanding of the relative negotiating power.
(Underdal, A.2002).
 Communication, communication as defined by Urey. and Fisher. (1982) is art
of listening and talking effectively, here the negotiator develops him/herself in
matter of active listening, listening to understand and speaking to be
understood and speaking for a purpose.
 The negotiator is also responsible for establishing legitimacy, describes
legitimacy in negotiation as the criteria to employed that persuades both
 parties that non is being rippled off in the negotiation. (Urey,W.& Fisher.
(1982)

In a project like the one in the present Case study with the objective to upgrade a
Rural Health Canter in to a modern state of art level three hospital, the upgraded
hospital is expected have a theatre, cardiology, paediatrics,
Oncology ,Psychiatric ,dentistry and radiology department. The general wards and
dispensary should be included also as part of the project product. The different
departments and units of this hospital must be built as outlined in the product
specification and be equipped with the relevant equipment’s. Negotiation during the
life of this project will be categorised in three major categories, Firstly negotiations
with sponsors or clients, secondly negotiations with the project team group and
finally negotiation with the stake holders (Suppliers).

 Negotiation with the Sponsor/Client, as a project manager I will be expected

to engage in a number of negotiations with the sponsor on a number of
activities which include scope of the project, schedule pricings
 Negotiation with Project Group, Here Negotiations will be centred around
allocation of responsibilities and managing workloads, in an event where a
team of the group is particularly overwhelmed with a task due to its
complexity, focus is shifted to manage workload of such nature where all
affected team members are brought on board to discuss the assigning of
tasks and address frame, skill level and distribution of responsibility.

Negotiating with stakeholders, all through the construction process of the hospital I
will be expected to engage in negotiations with other stake holders apart from the
project owners and the project group which will include contractors for supply of
specific materials, Insurance companies etc.

A classic example of a negotiation that is likely to take place in this upgrade of the
rural health centre, is bringing a contractor on board the project team group.
Invitation to tenders of a negotiated contract will be sent to all would be contractors
will be advertised. Contained in that tender will be a copy of the project
specifications.in a negotiated contact, the client has the flexibility of choosing their
preferred contractor, based on the contractor’s reputation and credibility, the different
approaches discussed above will be employed to come to the place of agreement
where binding contracts are assigned and approved by relevant authorities in the
project.

Reference List
Raiffa, H., Richardson, J., & Metcalfe, D. (2002). Negotiation analysis: The Science
and Art of Collaborative Decision-making. Cambridge, Harvard University Press
Schelling, T. (1960). The Strategy of Conflict. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
Underdal, A. (2002). The Outcomes of Negotiation. In Kremenyuk, V.
(ed.), International Negotiation: Analysis, Approaches, Issues. California, Jossey-
Bass.
Craddock, W. T. (2010). Five things every project manager should know about
negotiation. Paper presented at PMI® Global Congress 2010—North America,
Washington, DC. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
Lewicki, R. (1992). Negotiating Strategically. In Cohen, A. (ed.), The Portable MBA in
Management. New York, John Wiley & Sons.
Anton, R. J. (1990). Drawing the line: An exploratory test of ethical behavior in
negotiation.Int. J. Conflict Manage. 1: 265–280

Ignatieff, G.,Fisher., & Urey, W. (1982).Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement

without Giving in Roger Fisher and William Urey. International Journal, 37(4),
649. https://doi.org/10.2307/40202101